[oxryly1]

It persists because it's the only remotely affordable housing positive legislation that appeals to both renters _and_ homeowners.

New market-rate development that would keep pace with demand is consintently zoned and voted out by the electorate. It's an issue in every city in CA for sure.

[chimeracoder]

> It persists because it's the only remotely affordable housing positive legislation that appeals to both renters _and_ homeowners.

It's really not at all, and I don't know where you get the idea that rent control appeals to homeowners (homeowners hate it!).

> New market-rate development that would keep pace with demand is consintently zoned and voted out by the electorate. It's an issue in every city in CA for sure.

There are plenty of other programs which are much more effective. In California, no, but that's not the only place to look for examples.

[oxryly1]

Well, I guess its more accurate to say it's the only thing that homeowners will even tolerate -- they do in my city. It's the landlords that hate it, but fortunately they don't get a lot of sympathy in my town's electorate.

Now if you talk zoning and granting permits, that's where the hate really begins.

And yes, I'm referring to CA where the housing-as-investment vehicle has distorting things more than most other places.